×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Rare Operating Apple 1 Rakes In $374,500 At Sotheby's Auction

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the new-iphone-price-confirmed dept.

Apple 118

coondoggie writes "It's not one-of-a-kind, but it's pretty darn close. Sotheby's this week auctioned off a rare, working Apple 1 computer for $374,500 to an unnamed bidder. The price was more than double the expected price listed on the Sotheby's web site. Sotheby's notes about the Apple 1 say it is one of six thought-to-be-operational boxes and one of about 50 known to exist."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

118 comments

Well... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40340213)

Sounds like a pretty run of the mill Apple mark up...

Re:Well... (4, Interesting)

PatPending (953482) | about 2 years ago | (#40340589)

$666.66 in 1976 had the same buying power as $2,710.75 in 2012.

Now, as then, that'll buy you Apple's latest and greatest computer.

(Actually it's $2,799.00 but still remarkably close given this span of 36 years!)

Re:Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40340727)

I wonder: what today's value would be if one had purchased $666.66 worth of Apple stock upon its initial offering?

Re:Well... (3, Informative)

Dahamma (304068) | about 2 years ago | (#40341903)

$105 832 based on today's close. So I guess the Apple 1 was still a good investment! (if you were one of the 5 people who managed to keep it functional for 30 years).

Re:Well... (3, Interesting)

cnaumann (466328) | about 2 years ago | (#40342679)

The Apple IPO was in 1980 for $22/share. $666.66 would have purchased a little over 30 shares. Since then, it has paid a few dollars in dividends (which can be ignored) and split 2:1 three times. You would now own 240 shares, and it closed today at $574 for a value of $137,000.

Re:Well... (1)

Dahamma (304068) | about 2 years ago | (#40345823)

I used the closing price on 12/12/80, which was around $29, giving only 184 shares. I figured no one but insiders and institutional investors usually manage to get the offering price, and if you were one of those you wouldn't be worried about where to best spend $666 ;)

Re:Well... (1)

macs4all (973270) | about 2 years ago | (#40346151)

$105 832 based on today's close. So I guess the Apple 1 was still a good investment! (if you were one of the 5 people who managed to keep it functional for 30 years).

Six.

Mine works, too.

Re:Well... (0)

geoffaus (623283) | about 2 years ago | (#40340753)

well if you dont measure in paper money but instead in real money ie gold - the price of gold in 1976 was roughly $125 per oz = 5.328oz so converting back into funny money at roughly $1626 per oz it would be worth $8663

Re:Well... (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40340833)

I know you think you're incredibly intelligent.

Please look at the values of gold for the last 50 years and realize that the only reason gold is worth so much now is idiots who think it has some inherent value different than any other publicly traded commodity. See how the price spikes in the last six years? See the correlation between the price increase and wackjobs telling you gold is the only safe option?

Re:Well... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40340881)

No gold has spiked because of all the QE and LTRO - people are worried that the governments with so much debt are going to try and get out of it by printing their way out and because interest rates are so low there are too many other options to protect your wealth. No fiat currency has ever lasted

Re:Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40340911)

not too many other options

Re:Well... (1)

Skippy_kangaroo (850507) | about 2 years ago | (#40341223)

More accurate would be to say, no metallic standard has ever lasted. They all died - every one of them. Gone, kaput, ex-currencies.

Fiat currencies, on the other hand, are alive and kicking. You can find them in every corner store.

Re:Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40341749)

How long of a run did the metallic standards have before going kaput?

How long have we had non-metal-based fiat money?

Re:Well... (1)

0123456 (636235) | about 2 years ago | (#40341963)

Fiat currencies, on the other hand, are alive and kicking. You can find them in every corner store.

The average lifespan of a fiat currency is around 40 years.

The world came off the last vestiges of the gold standard around 40 years ago. Gold is exploding and the Euro, at least, is heading toward the dustbin of history.

Odd, that.

Re:Well... (2)

arose (644256) | about 2 years ago | (#40342529)

You're lumping all gold based currencies, splitting up the fiats all without even touching on silver standards. What kind of argument is that?

Re:Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40342023)

No, gold "spiked" well before all the QE and LTRO.

It climbed from $350 to $500 between 2004 and 2006. By the end of 2007 as it was becoming apparent that Credit Default Swaps were going to unwind it reached $800. by March 2008 it had reached $1000. Then the stock market crash happened in October 2008. And yes, since then it as steadily climbed to where it is now, but I wouldn't call it a spike. As spikes go, it's pretty blunt IMO.

Quantitative Easing and Long Term Refinancing Operations are activities that were initiated after the crash to deal with the recession that followed the crash and the credit default swaps unwinding. The US didn't employ QE until late 2008, i.e. after the stock market crash. The Bank of England and the European Central Bank followed suit later.

Re:Well... (2)

mcavic (2007672) | about 2 years ago | (#40341555)

real money

Please send me all of your "worthless" paper money. I'll send back a box of pure copper pieces.

Re:Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40341835)

Gold is nothing more than a common barter. As such it allows for a value index of items. Fiat money accomplishes the same thing with the only difference being you print fiat money instead of borrowing gold. In the end using a shiny rock for currency doesn't really change anything.

Re:Well... (1)

nedlohs (1335013) | about 2 years ago | (#40341849)

There's a limit to how much gold you can borrow. There is no limit to how much fiat money you can print.

That is a pretty big difference (which doesn't mean gold backed money is better, just that it really does change something).

Re:Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40343065)

No it doesn't change anything. If gold is scarce. It just means you will trade lesser amounts of it when it gains more value.

Re:Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40342005)

Gold is awesome! If I had bought $1000 worth in 1981, I could have sold it in 2008 for $1000!

Expensive, but... (2)

Iniamyen (2440798) | about 2 years ago | (#40340237)

Still cheaper than an iPhone

Re:Expensive, but... (1)

olsmeister (1488789) | about 2 years ago | (#40340271)

And immune to viruses, too.

Re:Expensive, but... unique (3, Interesting)

muon-catalyzed (2483394) | about 2 years ago | (#40340461)

Very scarce and unique item, that thing should be pretty hard to copy as all the chips on the board are impossible to manufacture nowdays. Who does MOS at that big scale today ? Or the other rare electronic components inside..

Such an artifact might be worth millions in a few decades, should be a good anti-inflation bet.

Re:Expensive, but... unique (1)

SlippyToad (240532) | about 2 years ago | (#40341985)

It is only selling due to nostalgia.

I honestly doubt it will be worth much in 100 years.

Re:Expensive, but... unique (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 2 years ago | (#40342641)

Nostalgia won't exist in 100 years?

Re:Expensive, but... unique (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40343011)

Nostalgia won't exist in 100 years?

The Nostalgia market generally peaks when guys who had that item as a teenager go through their mid-life crisis. Do you think that a lot of people born in 2000 have some emotional attachment to 8 track tapes?

Re:Expensive, but... unique (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40345609)

At that point, it'll be a curiosity from a long since dead company that few people would have been alive to see.

Re:Expensive, but... unique (1)

NicBenjamin (2124018) | about 2 years ago | (#40343773)

Depends on whether Apple's still a force to be reckoned with. If Apple's dominating the electronics-implanted-directly-into-your-eyeball trade the way it dominates phones a working Apple I assembled by none other the Woz's sister is gonna be pretty damn valuable.

Heck even if it isn't a force to be reckoned with if Apple is recognized as a pivotal and important company it's products will be valuable as antiques. Stradivarius violins ain't cheap.

Re:Expensive, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40340893)

Oh, yeah? You're forgetting the exploit that occurs when one plays Black Sabbath backward via the cassette interface!

Re:Expensive, but... (1)

Golden Section (961595) | about 2 years ago | (#40343527)

This was an auction. *Every* person in the world, excluding just one, thought this items was worth less than the final offer.

Re:Expensive, but... (1)

macs4all (973270) | about 2 years ago | (#40346183)

This was an auction. *Every* person in the world, excluding just one, thought this items was worth less than the final offer.

According to one article I read, it eventually came down to two bidders; one online, and one on the phone. Phone guy won.

Bah (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40340279)

No SSD? No retina screen? No ethernet or firewire port?! Worst Mac ever.

(yes, I know it's not a Mac)

Re:Bah (0)

ganjadude (952775) | about 2 years ago | (#40342247)

an apple that you can work on yourself? woah, no wonder its so expensive! shit id pay for the priviledge of being able to work on an apple myself, from my understand you cant do that anymore, even the memory is hard wired............

Re:Bah (2)

drkim (1559875) | about 2 years ago | (#40343023)

Actually, it has solid-state storage, no DVD-R, no BD support, not much on gaming, and it HAS a retina display (if you stand back far enough)...

...so yeah, it IS the new Mac!

My high school had one, way back in 1977 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40340409)

I wonder if they still have it, and if it still works.

If they do, that'd make one heluva good PTA fundraiser.

36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40340505)

I find it amazing that the three 2,400uF electrolytic capacitors are still working after 36 years! These capacitors slowly degrade over time--I wonder what their capacitance is today?

Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! (2)

fnj (64210) | about 2 years ago | (#40340681)

They didn't make everything out of CRAP in those days. I've got electrolytics over 50 years old in an R-392 surplus tube type receiver that still work fine - the whole receiver works fine, dozens of tubes, intricate geared ganged tuning slugs and all. If you contracted to build that thing today you would probably pay north of $100,000 per, even using surplus tubes from ebay.

I've got a 10,000 uF 15 V electrolytic I bought around 1960 or so, somewhere. Or was it 100,000? If I can find it, I can test it with a DVM and a resistor.

Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! (4, Insightful)

Nimey (114278) | about 2 years ago | (#40341027)

Of course they did. It's just that the crap stuff isn't here anymore, so the survivors were the better ones.

Same deal with houses, when some idiot says that they make worse houses now, they're forgetting about all the crap houses from back then that don't exist anymore.

Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! (3, Informative)

hairyfeet (841228) | about 2 years ago | (#40342555)

While that is certainly true, i'd add that back then there simply weren't that many manufacturers for chips and caps so you didn't get really chip shitty dodgy parts like you do today. back then the boards were thick, traces thick, caps were made by a few companies for primarily industrial uses so were built tough, there just wasn't tons of truly cheap shitty parts to build something like that out of.

This is why I'd argue that its easier, when comparing number existing VS number made of course, that its more likely that old VIC or Atari VCS will work well VS say your average PC from 1994 or the first Playstations, because by that time it was a LOT easier to cut corners by using cheap chips than it was in the late 1970s. There is a good reason why a lot of today's stuff is called 'designed for the dump" and that is because the parts are so thin and cheap that you can practically look at it funny and kill the damned thing whereas i can't even count how many times i knocked my old VIC off my desktop into the floor and it was still working when it disappeared during my last move 5 years ago.

Finally i have to wonder whether we'll have anything THAT old still working 36 years from now thanks to the new solder and tin whiskers. I have an engineering buddy and you want to hear an all day rant just bring up the new solder, he says he can't count the number of times he's opened up something fairly new that failed and couldn't trace it back to the new solder. So while I wouldn't be surprised if you'll be able to find PCs from the 70s and 80s still running i have to wonder if we'll see anything from our current era or will it all be in the dump.

Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! (1)

Crosshair84 (2598247) | about 2 years ago | (#40344507)

Ahhh, I dream of the day that leaded solder is used again in electronics. Got to love brain-dead environmentalists who don't bother researching WHY some things are done the way they are.

Lead paint in kids toys? Yea, no good reason for that.

Lead solder in electronics? VERY VERY VERY GOOD F*****G REASONS FOR USING IT.

Any environmental savings is more than made up by the lowered reliability and shorter lifespans. Anyone who thinks lead-free solder has been a good idea is either ignorant of its problems or an idiot.

Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! (1)

macs4all (973270) | about 2 years ago | (#40346251)

Ahhh, I dream of the day that leaded solder is used again in electronics. Got to love brain-dead environmentalists who don't bother researching WHY some things are done the way they are.

Lead paint in kids toys? Yea, no good reason for that.

Lead solder in electronics? VERY VERY VERY GOOD F*****G REASONS FOR USING IT.

Any environmental savings is more than made up by the lowered reliability and shorter lifespans. Anyone who thinks lead-free solder has been a good idea is either ignorant of its problems or an idiot.

Yeah. And they didn't even replace it with some known-inert metal, either.

Twenty years from now, they'll be bitching about all the Bismuth and Indium leaching into the water table.

Mark my words. You heard it here, first!

Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! (2)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 2 years ago | (#40342201)

They didn't make everything out of CRAP in those days

Average build quality may have been higher (though it wasn't always), but that doesn't change the fact that old electrolytic caps will still fail. If you read a guide on troubleshooting an old solid-state pinball machine from the late 1970s or early 1980s, one of the first things it will tell you to do is replace the filter caps. They can and usually do go bad over time, causing unstable operation.

Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! (2)

fnj (64210) | about 2 years ago | (#40345885)

I don't have to read anything. I have first hand experience with many kinds of antique electronics. I'm not going to tell you that electrolytics never failed until crap manufacturers started using crap constituents and crap manufacturing in the late 90's, but I CAN tell you they didn't practically always fail after a piss-poor life like they did after that. And I CAN tell you a lot of mil surplus stuff from Vietnam, Korea, and WW-II still works, original electrolytics and all. That's not a guess; that's first hand experience. I CAN tell you that it's not uncommon that computer equipment from the 70s and 80s still works, but it IS uncommon that stuff from the late 90s through at least the mid 2000's works for more than a few years, and there is still a lot of crap being built, though it is starting to recover a little from the nadir of around 2000.

Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! (2)

tlhIngan (30335) | about 2 years ago | (#40342405)

They didn't make everything out of CRAP in those days

You realize that there are only SIX known operating Apple 1's, right? The production run was around 200. That means roughly 3% survived - the rest are either in a landfill, or non-operational. And who knows what condition they are in - for all we know, they could've had parts replaced (including capacitors).

Heck, the original Apple 1 hanging at 1 Infinite Loop might not even work anymore. (It's sitting in a plaque marked "Our Founder").

Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! (1)

toddestan (632714) | about 2 years ago | (#40345633)

I wonder how often the working ones were powered up over the years? Generally speaking, electrolytic capacitors will last longer if they are used occasionally.

Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! (2)

macs4all (973270) | about 2 years ago | (#40346277)

They didn't make everything out of CRAP in those days

You realize that there are only SIX known operating Apple 1's, right? The production run was around 200. That means roughly 3% survived - the rest are either in a landfill, or non-operational. And who knows what condition they are in - for all we know, they could've had parts replaced (including capacitors).

Heck, the original Apple 1 hanging at 1 Infinite Loop might not even work anymore. (It's sitting in a plaque marked "Our Founder").

I think that one got sold, didn't it.

Oh, and it's SEVEN now. My one-owner Apple 1 still works, and it isn't in the Apple 1 Registry. Mike Willeagal (who runs the Apple 1 Registry site) says he can't figure out where Sotheby's came up with the "Six working" figure, except maybe they counted the ones on his site that mention that they have BEEN working.

Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 2 years ago | (#40343183)

Its the same in the software industry. You make so much money from support that it doesn't pay to make things that last (see my sig).

Re:36 y.o. electrolytic capacitors! (1)

macs4all (973270) | about 2 years ago | (#40346207)

I find it amazing that the three 2,400uF electrolytic capacitors are still working after 36 years! These capacitors slowly degrade over time--I wonder what their capacitance is today?

Mine still work. And the capacitance of those computer-grade caps stays pretty good, even after all this time.

Having said that, I still brought my Apple 1 up on a Variac, with all the chips removed, the last time I fired it up.

Some things money can't buy... (3, Funny)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about 2 years ago | (#40340581)

...a retail price of $666.66, a number that garnered complaints among conservative Christians

A new Apple I, $666.66. Upsetting conservative Christians, priceless.

Re:Some things money can't buy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40341519)

Apple marketing company HQ is loacted in the hell. XD

Replicas (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40340605)

There are a few replicas available for those of us who can't afford a real Apple 1. The least expensive is Briel Computers' "Replica 1" [brielcomputers.com] which is not a cosmetic replica but more of a "work-alike" computer. Applefritter.com's Tom Owad wrote a book [applefritter.com] based on that kit. On the other extreme is Mike Willegal's "Mimeo 1" [willegal.net] which is an extremely accurate reproduction. I know the people behind these kits/sites and they're all very hobby-centric.

Re:Replicas (1)

macs4all (973270) | about 2 years ago | (#40346323)

There are a few replicas available for those of us who can't afford a real Apple 1. The least expensive is Briel Computers' "Replica 1" [brielcomputers.com] which is not a cosmetic replica but more of a "work-alike" computer. Applefritter.com's Tom Owad wrote a book [applefritter.com] based on that kit. On the other extreme is Mike Willegal's "Mimeo 1" [willegal.net] which is an extremely accurate reproduction. I know the people behind these kits/sites and they're all very hobby-centric.

Yeah. Mike Willeagal (creator of the Mimeo-1, and owner of the Apple 1 Registry site) even went to the trouble of creating a custom font for the silkscreen layer. I asked him if he X-Rayed the original board, and he said "No", and that he simply took a LOT of high-detail photos, and then went back and forth, printing out his board and laying it on a light table with the original.

I don't know much about the Replica 1; but it isn't a cold-copy of the original, like Mike's is. It's so close that I asked him if anyone has tried to auction one of his off AS an original. He said he deliberately put a marking on his board to prevent that from happening...

And yes, as an owner of an Apple 1 myself, it IS that close.

Why? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40340607)

I have a TRS-80 in my attic. Haven't powered it on for a few years, but it worked last time I tried it. It was made in 1977. To be fair, there was no reality distortion field model released with this particular brand.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40340869)

maybe cause the apple I predates the Trash 80 by a handful of years, hand designed by woz as a teen and packaged by 4 people in a garage instead of mass produced in a chineese sweatshop?

You are a clueless moron, and a dipshit to boot.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40341219)

maybe cause the apple I predates the Trash 80 by a handful of years

So a ProcTech Sol-20 should be going for over $100,000 as well, right?

hand designed by woz as a teen and packaged by 4 people in a garage

So? By your idiotic logic a PET 2000 should go for $100,000 because it was hand designed by Chuck Peddle, who by the way, designed the CPU in your precious precious Apple 1.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40341459)

PET = Peddle's Ego Trip

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40341773)

if the pet 2000 wasnt inspired by a prototype apple II, and not produced in mass production, by an already established company a year earlier, then maybe yes

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40343175)

So? By your idiotic logic a PET 2000 should go for $100,000 because it was hand designed by Chuck Peddle, who by the way, designed the CPU in your precious precious Apple 1.

Maybe if Commodore was still in business, and if they had completely turned the personal computer, mobile phone, MP3 player, TV, and music businesses upside down, and their market cap made them the most valuable company in the world.

Maybe.

Re:Why? (1)

macs4all (973270) | about 2 years ago | (#40346387)

So a ProcTech Sol-20 should be going for over $100,000 as well, right?

While not as valuable as Apple 1s, IIRC, Sol-20s fetch a bit, too.

And Chuck Peddle and friends also ripped off about all of Motorola's silicon designs when they left Mot.

Remember the 6501? Remember the 6520?

I am a great fan of the 6502 and all Apple products, AND an owner of a WORKING Apple 1; but let's not revise history TOO much, eh?

Re:Why? (1)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 2 years ago | (#40341313)

mass produced in a chineese sweatshop?

Hey Anonymous Coward, crack open a history book. In 1977 Mao had been dead for a year. I guarantee they weren't building TRS-80s in China. More than likely Texas.

Re:Why? (1)

ganjadude (952775) | about 2 years ago | (#40342261)

as opposed to the apple line now which is...built in a chineese sweatshop......

ACs... come out of hiding when you talk crap, its no fun this way

Morality (1)

pellik (193063) | about 2 years ago | (#40340623)

Was apple evil back then? Or did that only happen later?

Re:Morality (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40340645)

Were they evil? I'd say the price of $666 speaks for itself. (If you go in for that sort of tripe.)

Re:Morality (1)

ganjadude (952775) | about 2 years ago | (#40342267)

apple got evil IMO when they killed the PPC and it was all over when the ipod and itunes arived (or jobs came back, take your poision

In other news... (0)

frostilicus2 (889524) | about 2 years ago | (#40340631)

A rare Granny Smith bearing the Apple logo was sold to a turtleneck wearing gentleman in exchange for his life savings.

What happens... (2)

wbr1 (2538558) | about 2 years ago | (#40340643)

...if you take that puppy to a 'Genius Bar'. Most of those geniuses wouldn't even know what it was, and that the Woz actually built it with his bare hands.

Re:What happens... (4, Interesting)

petsounds (593538) | about 2 years ago | (#40341143)

Well, technically they probably wouldn't know what it was immediately simply because the Apple I shipped as basically a motherboard. People had to buy their own case, power supply, etc -- no different than the custom-built PCs of today. So unless the 'Genius' opened the case, they wouldn't necessarily even know it was an Apple product.

It's interesting to note that even back then, Apple's philosophy was sell the hardware, give away the software [wikimedia.org] [big jpg ahead].

From the Apple I ad: "And since our philosophy is to provide software for our machines free or at minimal cost, you won't be continually paying for access to this growing software library."

Re:What happens... (2)

ganjadude (952775) | about 2 years ago | (#40342285)

yeah, but back then they let you have access to the hardware, they even gave you manuals with the pinouts, not so much today, if you dont like it, too bad....

Re:What happens... (1)

jo_ham (604554) | about 2 years ago | (#40346057)

That's why they switched to socketed CPUs and removable MXM graphics cards on the iMac, and screw-less PCI card and hard drive caddies in the Pro, right?

Oh, and quick and easy to remove bottom panels (with standard RAM, hard drives and so on) in the Macbook Pro.

But oh wait, they made a new computer with proprietary, tiny parts to make it super thin, that means they hate people who upgrade! Got it! If you don't like it then too bad... err, I mean "buy the other laptops they sell".

Future Value? (1)

cynop (2023642) | about 2 years ago | (#40340705)

I'm curious if the buyer was a technology enthousiast, Apple lover or simply someone making a future investment? With all the craze for Jobs, it feels like such an item would probably rise in value in the future.

Re:Future Value? (2)

Tourney3p0 (772619) | about 2 years ago | (#40340831)

There are other, rarer items from that era that consistently sell for much less. I won't speculate on the other possibilities, but technology enthusiast can safely be ruled out.

Re:Future Value? (1)

cynop (2023642) | about 2 years ago | (#40340935)

Do you mean Apple, Jobs or home computer items? The way i see it, the value of each category is radically different.

Re:Future Value? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40341045)

While it's possible it will raise in value it would be a really silly investment. I'd hope someone with enough disposable income to pay for it would recognize that and bought it because they're a collector of old computers, apple enthusiast, general technology enthusiast, etc.

--wmbetts

Posting AC because I have mod points.

Anti-Apple Kool-Aid (0)

cyclebiff (2509462) | about 2 years ago | (#40341155)

'Apple Markup'? Oh. Okay. I see. You think this auction has nothing to do with you. You load your custom linux kernel say... I don't know... some run of the mill Debian flavor, for instance because you're trying to tell the world that you take yourself too seriously to care about which OS's Apple is putting out. But what you don't know is that that Apple is not just linux-based, it's not redhat. It's not mandrake. It's actually OS-X. And you're also blithely unaware of the fact that in the 2000's, Steve Jobs did a collection of innovations to the tech industry. And then I think it was the iPod... wasn't it that revolutionized the music industry? I think we need an iPod here. And then iPod quickly showed up in the collections of eight different major retailers. And then it, uh, filtered down through the department stores and then trickled on down into some tragic Think Geek site where you, no doubt, fished it out of some clearance sale. However, that iPod represents millions of dollars and countless jobs and it's sort of comical how you think that you've made a choice that exempts you from the technology industry when, in fact, you're using the technology that was *selected* for you by the people at Apple despite their current 'Apple Markup's.

Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid (0)

ganjadude (952775) | about 2 years ago | (#40342307)

how in the hell can you claim that apple OSX is actually behind redhat, when the treuth is OSX is a spin off of the linix kernal as much as red hat is???

oh, new UID, troll, thats why

Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid (1)

Majik Sheff (930627) | about 2 years ago | (#40342499)

You might want to look into the difference between a Linux kernel and a BSD kernel (which is what OSX is based on). The differences are not... trivial.

Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid (1)

ganjadude (952775) | about 2 years ago | (#40343919)

thats true indeed, my only point was that it is not "just os-x" did not want to open that can of worms.

Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid (1)

stoborrobots (577882) | about 2 years ago | (#40342661)

Awesome analogy! I really want to learn that soliloquy from Devil Wears Prada..

For those who don't get it, http://youtu.be/1LVptO7o4L8#t=1m25s [youtu.be]

Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid (2)

cyclebiff (2509462) | about 2 years ago | (#40343013)

It truly warms my heart that someone caught the reference, and the humor. And yes, the people who marked me down didn't get it; they were too busy feverishly googling BSD and Linux history to see that my post was actually a rant from a 2006 film about the fashion industry. Please stop being so serious, SD'ers :)

Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | about 2 years ago | (#40342671)

OSX is NetBSD with a propitary UI, supposedly based on next (ATT/SCO Unix System 4?) ... usually by people who have not used a next machine for any significant amount of time, anyway you can download the open source version called Darwin, with no apple code what so ever from Apple's website. To date the only unix operating system in a very small segment of consumer desktop computing ... either way not nearly as innovative as people like to think, it was over a decade old idea when it came out.

Also it wasn't really the Ipod that changed the music industry, its just a player ... during a time when everyfuckingbody had a MP3 player on the market, it was iTunes, the application and marketplace that allowed you to get qulity music virus free without stealing that changed the music industry ... maybe ... kind of sort of ...

And if you were not aware, those millions of jobs are in China, which compared to civilized work conditions are a dungeon, though slowly getting slightly better.

Anywho, I just think you should know some facts before getting all buthurt because people dont like apple... I dont like them because of their games going all the way back to their 8 bit systems with incompatible hardware for their own computers, moving on to proprietary ram and device bios's, onwards to prams that would lock up, and the manual says you need to take it to a dealer so they can hit the button hidden under the cpu for you (8500 I am looking at you) to today, where if you just happen to bought a small selection of apple computers you need a fucking magic SATA plug no one makes.

Piss on that, no thanks

Re:Anti-Apple Kool-Aid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40343147)

NetBSD? Hardly.

Much of the userland is a mishmash of all the various BSDs. How do I know? Someone once published all the version strings in all the libraries. You can do this too. Why do I say "much" and not "all". Well, Next, and then Apple have added a lot of their own special sauce, not limited to just the GUI.

As for Darwin source? On opensource.apple.com? That was the actual kernel source at one point, up to like Tiger, but then Apple forked and took their source tree private/proprietary. It started out originally as a CMU Mach monolithic kernel, which, not surprisingly, looks somewhat like most of the BSD kernels.

And I thought $9,000 was Stretching It (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40341659)

About 10 years ago I saw an Apple 1 sell for a little over $9,000 on eBay including the original wooden case and I thought that was marginally justifiable. This auction result is just ridiculous, it's simply too high.

Kill the Head Vampire (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40342797)

If you kill this Apple 1, will all the other Apple devices around the world revert to a move open and less evil state?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...